Author 



f * 




o 
t. 

o 



Title 



^ ** s 



Class U.-^nSJ^^- 

Book - ^..JrL 



Imprint. 



ia--t7372-l OPO 



LETTER TO A. B. J., 



AUTHOR OF TflF, PAMPHLET ENTITLED 



"THE UNION AS IT WAS 



CONSTITUTION AS IT IS." 




ff.^ ^v^^-.- 




'/ 



V/^""f V oo^ 



LETTER TO A. B. J., 

AUTHOR OF THE rAMPIILF.T ENTITLED 



'•'TTIE UNION AS IT WAS 

/' 




^ AND TIIK 

7^ 



CONSTITUTTON AS IT IS/' 



Jlrln ^Jovl; : 

FEANCIS & LOUTREL, PRINTERS AND STATIONERS, ^T^ MAIDEN LANE. 

1 S O 3 



U^^. Ova 



'"W/ 



a 



6r 



L E T T E R . 



New York, Makch IGth, 1863. 

A. B. J , E.s(i. 

Dear Sir: The pamphlet to ^vliicli you ivterred 
in your note, as containing your political views, 
reached nie sometime since, but unusual eno-aire- 

' or? 

ments have left me no opportunity to write you at 
an earlier day than this. 

You are (j^uite right in saying our \ie\vs are di- 
ametrically opposite. I can liardly imagine two 
stand-points more widely apart, or inferences from 
facts and history more at variance than }'ours and 
mine. Yet eacli is trying to see the entire truth ; 
to look it sijuarely in tlie face; to make logical 
deductions and form opinions to live by now and 
evei". Perliaps religious diversities — strange and 
manifold doctrines, absurd and rational, drawn 
from tlic same foimtain-head of spiritual kuow- 



( ^ ) 

ledge — furDisli the best parallel to this con- 
trariety of ])olitieal creeds, sjmiigiiig from our 
commou liistory and national institutions. This 
may be fortunate for the self-esteem of the indi- 
\idiial, ho^^■ever disastrous to truth, patriotism or 
religion in the community. Only the man wlio 
holds his opinions strongly, (whether riglit or 
wrong intrinsically,) will ever trouble himself to 
saturate the world with his thoughts. Thus is 
sown broadcast, error and truth, wisdom and folly, 
light and darkness. He is lucky who can winnow 
out the tares, and '" shoot folly as it flies." I sin- 
cerely invoke the spirit of the motto you adopt : 

■• wad some power the giftie gie us 
To see oursels as others see us I 
It wad frae monie a blunder free us 
And foolish notion." 

I think, however, I should hardly venture to 
write to you on this subject if I had not lived 
with slavery and seen it at Iiome. More than 
twenty years ago I passed two or three years in 
Florida. I have therefore seen the institution do- 
mesticated. I have witnessed its eifects alike on 
the white and on the black race, and I i-eallv 
believe the more malio-nant and deterioratino- in- 
fluences of sla\'erv are to be found amono- the 



( 5 ) 

white, brutalizing as they are on the l>lack man. 
I am teraf)ted, with these convictions, to examine 
somewhat at lencrth the views set forth in voar 
pamphlet. 

It is hardly worth while, j»erhaf>s, to more than 
allude to vour verbal criticism on ^' causele*> war," 
•• beneficent Government," and S4 > on, as you must 
be aware that such-like phrases of the newspapers 
convey a distinct and definite idea to the popular 
niin<l. For instance, everylnxJy understands that 
no justijiaU^ cause for the war was created by 
the constitutional election of Pre-^ident Lincoln; 
everybo<.ly knows, too, that if the South has not 
found ours a "beneficent Government" it is its 
own faidt, since Southern men have controled its 
action four-fifths of the whole time we have been 
a nation. Passing over the opening of your 
pamphlet, with these tew words, let me try to com- 
prehend the principle which underlies your subse- 
•juent pages. 

You say, "the true cause of our j>ics»riit troubles 
dates back to the formation of the Union under its 
existinsr Constitution, the States now in revolt de- 
sirinfiT no Constitution unless it should seci/re all 
rights of independent Jsovereignty to eachr 

Xow, as I read the history of the adoption of the 
Onistitution of the United States, the States in re- 



( c ) 

])ellion, or rutlier the ijeople of those States, (with 
the exception of one State,) readily accepted the 
Constitution under which we now live, without any 
such provision of independent sovereignty ', while in 
several of the Northern States, the j^eojole warmly 
opposed its adoption for months. It was the Nortli 
and not the South, which objected to the Consti- 
tution. Neither did the North oj^pose the amend- 
ment of the Constitution by which " the powers not 
delegated to the United States, are reserved to the 
States respectively, or to the people." 

Thus it ai:)pears, that the Southern States were 
eager to embrace the original Constitution without 
suggesting an amendment, much less proposing " all 
rights of independent sovereignty to each State." 
An idea, in fact, quite absurd on the face of it. 
How could a State, subject to the Constitutional 
restrictions of a General Government, be in any 
sense an independent sovereignty ? Yet this is the 
rock on which the South has split. Universal con- 
trol or Independent Sovereignty has been its aim. 
These are thoughts which have seduced our " way- 
ward sisters" into habits of habitual intemperance 
of word and deed, and threaten their ultimate ruin. 

Again, you say — " the North, fovoring in the 
General Government a centralization of all j^owers, 
and the South favorino; in the Government such 



( T ) 

powers only as tlie States several!}' can not exercise 
beneficially for tliemselves ; hence the Sonth de- 
sired a Constitution which could not he enlarged 
by construction." Yet on the next page, you ad- 
mit, tliat "the purchase of Louisiana from France, 
in 1803, Avas opposed by an almost undivided 
North : and so, also, was opposed the acipiisition 
of Florida, in 18l?l, and of Texas in 1845;' 

Now, sii', you nuist remember that Jefferson 
himself admitted, there w^^s no express constitu- 
tional power authorizing the Government to 1)U>' 
Louisiana. He justified it on the ground of expe- 
diency alone. It was necessary, he argued, to hold 
the mouths of the Mississippi, if we would control 
the trade of" the Father of Waters." But the strict 
constructionist of the North said, no, not even for 
a world of gain, will we stretch the Constitution 
beyond its letter and spirit. The latitudinarians 
of the South, however, had no doubts, no strict- 
construction theory to interfere with their urging 
the purchase. Nor had they any scruples in the 
case of Florida, much less in that of Texas, from 
whose Territory, though then free, they insisted 
on providing for the admission of four Slave 
States into the Union ! How seriously this state- 
ment conflicts with your's, is but too evident from 
the following quotation: "The North," you say, 



( 8 ) 

"soon began to inte]'])ret tlie Constitution lati- 
tudinonsly, and the South reHtrietively. Nor 
are the motives of either section speeiihitive 
merely; the North is commercial, manufactural 
and enterj)rising, and hence desires a protective 
tariff, a protective navy, fishing l)Ounties, and the 
construction or im2)rovenient, 1)y the General Gov- 
ermuent, of rivers, roads, canals, and harbors; while 
the South is agricultural, and Ijcnce desires free 
trade." 

The foregoing paragraph, in my view, contains 
several fallacies : 

1st, The North did not so construe the Constitu- 
tion, Lut endeavored to guard against such con- 
struction on the part of the South. 

2d. The North and West are vastly iiiore agricul- 
tural than the South, as to extent, variety, and 
value of jjroducts. It was slavery not agiicidtare 
the North aimed to restrict. 

3d. The "protective navy" protected the name 
and the fame of America the ^vorld over : it \)Yo- 
tected alike Southern and Northern ports ; it ]jro- 
tected and supported, also, large numbers of officers 
from Southern States. 

4th. The 2:)rotective tariff originated at the 
South. It was warmly advocated by John C. 
Calhoun : it cheapened to the Southern consumer, 



( f» ) 

every article protected : it opened a large North- 
ern market for Soutlierii cotton : it compelled the 
South, from economic motives, to l)uy of the North 
rather than of Enrope — this last was a grave of- 
fence ! 

Let this brief sununary suthce. Youi' own fair 
judgment, and ami)le knowledge, will extend the 
cases almost indefinitely. T cannot refrain, how- 
ever, from recurring to a new agricultural i)ro- 
duct of Illinois— one of the most prosperous and 
important of our Western States. During the past 
year Y,500,000 gallons of sorghum syrup have been 
produced there ; of which three thousand barrels 
have been sent from Quincy, in that State, to Mis- 
souri and Kentucky. Who can douljt that in five 
years, or less, Illinois will supply itself with sugar 
from free labor, and export largely besides ? 

As TO THE Territories. 

You say, "Congress persistently interdicted the 
nii«n'ation into the Territories of any Southern 
slave, making all free whom their masters should 

bring there." 

I regard it a work of supererogation, on the 
part of Congress, to declare negroes free, wliom 
their masters should take from a slave State into 



( 10 ) 

a free Territory. For tlie simple reason, tliat it ^vas 
ouly hj virtue, (or force,) of tlie law in such State 
that the neo^ro was hekl in bondao-e. Just as soon 
as he was voluntarily taken beyond the limit of 
the slave State, and placed on free soil, his fetters 
dropped off ! Do you ask why, ? Simply, because 
there was no law there to hold them on. 

The Territories belonging to the United States 
are governed only by laws and rules enacted by 
the Cono-ress of the United States. The Consti- 
tution, so far fr-om giving Congress power to en- 
slave a human being, has not even the word 
slavery in that instrument. The only indirect 
reference to the sul>ject being in that portion on 
which the odious fugitive slave haw was founded. 
A negro, therefore, who ^v^ls a slave in Louisiana, 
on beincr taken to one of our Territories bv his 
master, became instantly //-^(j, because neither Con- 
gress, nor Louisiana had the 2:»ower to I'e-shackle 
the man on free soiL The natural riirhts of man- 
hood were thus achieved. God never made a 
slave ! Man only boasts the hatefid prerogative. 
In the absence of man's law, therefore, a humau 
being, black or white, is a free man, and not a 
slave ! 

It has been speciously argued, I know, that we of 
the North deprive the South from taking their pro- 



( 11 > 

perty into our common Territories, while we cany 
ours there without ol)Struetion or qualification. 

Now. in fact, we extend the same rights and 
privileges to the South that we claim for the 
Xoi-th. The slave is the product of slave laws; 
of course, enacted in a slave State. The slave is 
not property by the common, the universal con- 
sent of mankind. He is only made so by local, 
special legislation. He can consequently be held 
and recognized as such only ^vithin the legitimate 
scope of such law. The moment he is taken l>e- 
yond the sphere of slave-law he is fi-ee. England 
declared, long ago. the principle that ''tree soil 
makes free men I" The Southerner cannot take his 
" peculiar institution" where there is no peculiar 
law to guarantee his pecidiar claim. In this re- 
spect he does not differ from the Xorthemer. 
Either can take into the free Terntoiies what all 
mankind, by universal consent, admit to ^ye pnv 
l>ei-ty. But neither can take more. For instamv. 
the New Yorker cannot take the Free Banking 
Laws of his State into a TeiTit»»ry of the Uniteil 
States; nor can the Massachusetts man carry 
there the laws of his State in reganl to manutac- 
turiuir, or any other local institution. 

Tlie North and the S^uith stan.l on precisely the 
same groun.l. There is perfect e^piality if the 



( l--^ ) 

slave is excluded, but there would not be if lie 
were compelled to wear his shackles on free soil. 
Our free Territories are governed, neither by the 
laws of South Carolina nor Connecticut, Ijut by 
rules and regulations adopted ])y the Congress of 
the United States, in which free and slave States 
are duly represented. It is idle to talk, therefore, 
of any injustice or hardship towards citizens of 
the South, when they enjoy all the rights and 
privileges in the Teriitories which have ever 
been claimed or exercised by citizens of the 
North. 

You state, substantially, on page 9, that the 
South purposely aided in the election of Mr. Lin- 
coln, yet "resolving that if Northern success should 
prove that the existence of the South in the Con- 
federacy could ]:>e thus ignored, the South would 
in turn ignore the Confederacy." What is this 
but a premeditated, deep-laid conspiracy to destroy" 
the Govei'ument if not permitted to rule ? Mark 
the language, too : " The Confederacy !" which not 
only has a bad odor, but, under the Constitution, 
no meaning whatever. It is true " The Union^^ 
was formed under the old confederation ; but the 
Constitution of the United States was formed hij 
the 2^eo2')le^ and not l)y a Confederation of States. 
Tliis form of speech, with such motives of action, 



( 13 ) 

ignores our nationality, annuls our Constitution, 
and would blot out more tlian eighty years of 
American history. 

General Jackson foretold tliis Rebellion, when, 
in 1833, after putting down Nullification, he said, 
" the tariff was only the pretext, and disunion and 
a Southern Confederacy the real object. The next 
pretext will be the negro, or the slavery question." 
He knew the Southern character, and this remark 
of his is more a deduction than a prophecy. 
Yet it is true in either sense. The conflict is be- 
gun. The deliberate conspiracy which was shad- 
owed forth at Ilichmond and Charleston, took 
form at Sumter. It is interesting, now, to see that 
those who have played the Jeremiali did l)ehold 
the shadows of coming events. Indeed, the ag- 
gressions of the slave power, made it i)lain to 
those who were not prophets, that wrong too oft re- 
peated nuist lead t<^ blows. The South disregard- 
ed, asiain and as^ain, all constitutional restraints 
whenever they stood in the wny of acquiring 
slave-territory by purse or sword. It attenq)ted 
to thrust on Kansas the hated Lecompton Consti- 
tution. It repealed the ^lissouri Conqu-omisc 
against all honor and justice, taking foi' tli<' 
South its part of the bargain, and tlien trying to 
steal the North's nlso. AVliat retributive justice 



(, 1^ ) 

may soon he administered l;)y an Act of Emanci- 
pation in Missouri itself! 

It is true a portion of the Nortli has tried to 
check and coml:>at this aggressive spirit. It has 
not disguised its hatred of slavery, its love of free- 
dom ; while the South has, first of all, loved slavery 
and despised restraint. Is it surprising that these 
opposite motives of action should fail to develope 
harmoniously ? And yet, but for the violent attack 
on the life of the nation, at Charleston, no doubt 
the North would liave borne and forborne with the 
insolence of the slave-power for many years to come. 
Such, however, liad ])een the })erversion of tlie 
Government of our fathers in favor of slavery, sucli 
tlie domination of slave-holders, that sooner or later 
tlie struggle for tlie mastery between freedom and 
op2:)ression, must have come. I am thankful to 
have been permitted to see the l)eginning of it, and 
hope to see the end. As a just God rules the 
world, I cannot doubt the final success of the 
cause of Freedom. 

Your pamj^hlet is entitled, " The ITnion as it 
was, and the Constitution as it is." 

Perhaps the readiest wa}^ of catching a glimpse 
of '' the Uniou as it 7/;c^9," is to ascertain the opin- 
ions, feelings, and views of those who formed the 
basis of our Government. I think the history of 



( 15 ) 

that period sliows, that tlie Fathers ^ve^e impressed 
with one prevalent feeling and strong desire, viz. : 
that freedom might be universal in our land. They 
hoped slavery would gradually, and at no distant 
day disappear. Witness the Declaration of our In- 
dependence and the Constitution: they lu-eathe 
the spirit of universal freedom, without one \\'(>r<l 
in favor of slavery. 

You remember, no d<nd)t, the well known let- 
ter of Washington to Lafayette, in Avhich he says: 
"Your purchase of an estate in the Colony of 
Cayenne, wifli a view of emancijxiting the slaves^ 
is a generous and noble proof of your humanity. 
Would to God a like spirit might diffuse itself 
generally into the minds of the people of this 
country." Again, in a letter to John F. Mercer, 
Washington says: "1 never mean, unless some 
particular circumstances compel me to it, to j^ossess 
another slave by purchase; it heing among nn/ 
fust wishes to see some iilan adopted Inj irhich 
slavery in this country may he ahoUshed by laiv.'" 
Washington also directs, in his last will, as follows : 
" U])on the d(vease of my wife, it is my will and 
dt'sire, that all my slaves, which I hold in my 
own right, shall receive their fi-cedom." Thus 
emancipating all the slaves which his own net 
could free. It has been pertinently asked: — 



( 16 ) 

"Would Washington have hesitated to do for 
his country, what he deemed it right to do foi- 
himself r' 

Jefferson's testimony against slavery was even 
still more emphatic, if possilde. In a letter to 
M. Warville, written in 1788, he declares: "The 
whole commerce between master and slave is a 
perpetual exercise of the most boisterous pas- 
sions ; the most unremitting despotism on the one 
part, and degrading submissions on the othei*. '''■■ 
'I'r * -;:- 'pijg jj^j^j^ must l)e a prodigy who can 
retain his manners and morals undepraved by 
such circumstances. ^' ^' ^' And can the liber- 
ties of a nation be thous^ht secure when we have 
removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the 
minds of the people that these liberties are the 
gift of God? That they are not to be violated 
l)nt with his wrath? Indeed, I tremUe for my 
country token I reflect tlicit God is just : that his 
justice cannot sleep forever ; that considering 
nund)ers, nature and natural means only, a revo- 
lution of the wheel of fortune, an exchange of 
situation, is among possible events; that it may 
become probable l)y supernatural interference ! 
The Almigldy luis no attribute trhlclt can talce side 
ivitli us in such a contest. '^ '" ''^' But we must 
wait with patience the Avorkings of an overruling 



( n ) 

Provideuce, and hope that that is preparing tho 
deliverance of these our suffering brethren. When 
the measure of their tears shall l)e full, doubtless 
a God of Justice will awaken to their distress, and 
l)y diffusing a light among their oppressors, or at 
Jengtli Inj liis exterminating tJninder^ manifest his 
attention to things of this world, and that they 
are not left to the guidance of blind fatality." 
Behold the opinion of another Southern man, one 
who kneA\' the force of lan2:ua«;e, and understood 
the subject he discussed. Could words 1)6 found 
more prophetic? Is not God manifesting '"'' It is ex- 
terminating tlmnder V 

The last public act of Benjamin Franklin Avas 
to sign, as President of an Abolition Society, a 
]!)etition to Congress, dated 12tli February, 1780, 
praying for the a1)olition of slavery, in the fol 
lowino* terms: 

"Your memorialists conceive themselves lound 
to use all jy-stijlalle endeavors to loosen tlie l)(»nds 
of slavery, and promote a general enjoyment of 
the blessings of freedom. Under these im])res- 
sions, they earnestly entreat your serious attention 
to the subject of slavery; that you will be ] (leased 
to countenance the re^itoration of lil)erty to thos(^ 
unhappy men who alone, in this land of tVcedom, 
are degraded into ])('i'p('tunl iHUidagc, and \\li<), 



( 18 ) 

amid tlie general joy of surrounding freemen, are 
groaning in servile subjection, lliat you toill de- 
vise means for removing this i neons isttncy from the 
character of the American i^eople. That j^ou will 
promote mercy and justice towards this distressed 
race, and that you will step to the very verge of 
the powTr vested in you for discouraging every 
species of traffic in the persons of our felh)W 
men." 

James Monroe, too, in the Virginia Convention, 
denounced slavery as " an evil which has preyed 
upon the very vitals of the Union, and has been 
prejudicial to all the States in wdiicli it has ex- 
isted." 

The foreo-oino; extracts from three Soutliern 
Presidents, and the wisest philosopher this country 
has produced, give us, I think, a clear idea of the 
spirit which animated the fathers of our Govern- 
ment. Freeiloni was the rnle, slavery the excej)- 

tion. 

Unluckily for the early extinction of slavery by 
that irradual decline they anticii^ated, Massachu- 
setts, soon after the close of the Eevolution, gave 
to the Soutli the cotton-gin. This simple machine 
quadrupled the value of slave lalior, as applied to 
cotton-growing. It increased the wealth, and in 
like measure tlie arrogance, of the slaveholders. 



( ly ) 

But for the recent unj)r()V(»ke(l Jiuuliiess of that 
peoi)le, Whitney would seem to liave postponed 
indefinitely the einancijmtion of the blacks. The 
power of that invention is now overcome by a 
Divine interposition in favor of the l)ondsman. Com- 
merce lia^ had her day. God's Justice cries for her's. 

"TiiE Constitution as It Is.'' 
Your statement under this head must have l)een 
indited as tlie utterance of a South Carolina fanatic. 
'^Rebels," you say, "can be punished for their 
treason only hy civil i)rocess, assisted, if iiecessar}-, 
by tlie militia, as a posse comitatus. The trial for 
their crimes must, however, be held in the State 
\vhere the crimes have been committed," &q. 

In other words the Nation has no riirht to de- 
fend its life. The Constitution, you make, " a 
sword in the hands of the Kebels, but a fetter to 
us" — as Professor Parsons has happily expressed 
it. Pray what would have been the fate of a 
Judge and Jury in Charleston, attempting to ti*y 
the Reljels who stormed and took Fort Sunitei*, at 
an odds of 800 to 80? "If these means failed," 
you say, "none existed." On being summoned, 
then, by a Itel)el army, we had only to vacate 
Washington, Philadeli)hia, New York, and Bun- 
ker Hill in turn ! and let Jelf. Davis take pos- 



( 20 ) 

session of eaoli and all. Is it possible you so 
interpret the constitutional oljligations of our 
Government i Is the first law of nature — self-pro- 
tection — binding on the individual, but not on the 
nation < Is that law abrogated by a written Con- 
stitution i Does " the Constitution's lack of coer- 
cive power" leave the people of this country to 
the tender mercies of disa2)pointed slave-holders? 
Have Ave of tlie North no rights of self-defense 
even i Have Ave ]iothing to do but " let the way- 
Avard sisters go,'' taking Avitli them Avhat tliey 
])lease? You say, "let them alone, or declare 
war against them as a foreign eneniA." All they 
say is, " let us alone." So says the burglar who 
has broken into your house, at midnight, and 
helped himself to your treasure. " Let me alone," 
he says, "or I Avill take your life. I have not 
only got your family silver, but your pistols and 
amnuinition, also. I Avill kill you, therefore, un- 
less you let me go, plunder and all." So the Re- 
bels say — "All we ask is to be let alone; Ave 
trust the Avhole Avorld knows this; especially Ave 
desire that Eno^land and France should understand 
it I" 

No, sir, that is not the letter or spirit of " the 
Constitution as it is," or "the Union as it Avas." 
The Constitution is not a rope of sand — nor is 



( 21 ) 

it freedom's luilter. It was uijulc to j)i\>tect and 
not to oppress mankind. In tliat portion of our 
laud, where all men have been secure in the en- 
joyment of their earnings, labor and enterprize 
have gone hand in hand, and their fruit has been 
abundant prosperity, moral, intellectual and ma- 
terial. While in that other portion, where the 
few have usurped the rights of the many, where 
toil \vas unrequited, and all manhood crushed out 
of the heart of the laborer, the standard of civil- 
ization has gradually sunk lower and lower. Keen- 
eyed retribution follows close on the oppressor. 
Slavery in this country has done more harm to 
the white man than to the black. It has couched 
the eye of the African and enabled him to catch 
glinq^ses of Christian truth and political rights ; 
it has given him some faint notion of his pro- 
l>er manhood. On the other hand, unbridled 
po\vei', lawless ambition, and uncontrolled sway 
over a subjected race, have lowered and degraded 
the white man. The slave has unconsciously 
avenged his wrongs on his white master, in the 
enslavement of that master to debasing passions, 
imgoverned A\ill and heartless tyranny. Slavery 
is a violation of the principle on which free gov- 
ernments are based. It is no safer for govern- 
ments, or communities, than for individuals to vio- 



late i»riiiri|>k'. riif t'liiitlaiiK'iital |'iinri|)lc nt" 
niili\rs(i} jitstii-i imi>l l>t' iiiaiiitaiiictl iii\ 'mlalc, nr 
till' jM-iialty is sure to l»t' fxai-tctl sooiu'i" <>r latri*. 
( )iii- tatli«'r^ <1('\ iati'il tVt»iii tlio i'.\ju-t liiu* of \\'^\\\ 
ill tlit'ir f(.iii|ir.iiiii^f w itli tlic cn il — >la\ crs . Im-- 
iinltl the piicr Wf \K\\ t<>r that tlf\ iatit»ii I "All 
tliiii'.;'^ \N liat«i<>rvrr \i- uould that iiicii ^IkmiM (h • 
to \«»ii, (jo ye t'veii so to th<iii." 

I\'rha})s yoii will say, '' The S<»iiiln-iii»r lldnks 
\\v is liiflit — ho is i-oii^cit'iitiou-i in this waifaic." 
But h'lw i-aii thi> \n' '. \\v has a kicii v\v to|- 
political ccoiittiiiv, he is t-diii-atrd in ]M»litii's, In- 
kiii»u s "all tin- tricks <it' the trath-.'" i j. kii'>\v> tin- 
Soutii j>aitii-ij>atr»l in the last j>i'e>i(h'!itial «'lee- 
tioii: ami. as vt»ii intiniatc (tor ulterior jmrposes), 
was ii<ii iiiiwiirmi/ to seeuff the ehction ot" Mr. 
LiiU'olii. Tlu' South had majorities in imth 
l>raiielies ot' C'ongre-s. Tin' Sii|>feiiie Conit ••!' tie- 
Tnite*] States, tor yeai-, had exhibited very strong; 
S(.iitheni }»roelivities, not t<> say great pli{il»ility 
— ns in the Dred Se(»tt deeisimi. Hut the case is 
most hapjtily state*!, and summed u]*, hy Mr. Van 
Hureu in his reeeut speech in tliis city. lie said : 
''They (the Southern men) assumed to set up a 
Government under the light \\\\u-\\ they claime<| 
to destroy the Union. They formed a Congress 
and elected a President. l)ut they were r.ot eon- 



( 23 ) 

teut with tills. They seized the property of the 
United States— they seized its forts, its ships, its 
treasure. They fired upon the flag of the United 
States at Fort Sumter, and claimed the rig-ht to 
exercise the power of a sovereign Government. 
Now, you will Lear in mind— every fair-minded 
man in the United States will bear in mind— that 
up to this time not one hair of their heads had 
been injured. No right of any Southern man had 
been invaded. History will record that the world 
never witnessed a rebellion against a Govermental 
authority before where the rebels could not lay 
their finger upon a thing to show that either their 
property, their liberty, or their rights had been, in 
the slightest particular, invaded." 

"Still," you may say, "from his stand-point the 
Southern man felt aggrieved." Then, I say, he 
not only took a wrong stand, but with his kno^v- 
ledge of the Constitution and the Government of 
his country he deliberately chose the wrong. It 
is possible that slavery had so dimmed the sio-ht 
within, " that he could not see his own darkness," 
l)ut he is responsible for that. The darkness is 
a mere consequence of slavery. A New-Zea- 
lander roasts a Missionary for breakfast, and does 
it conscientiously, from his stand-point, but does 
that make it any the less barbarous ? What ex- 



